No, this lens can of the imaging performance not with 2.8 / 4 or 17-35 / 16-35, keep 2.8 / 24-70, 2.8 or 4 / 70-200. But has one seriously expected at a 11-times zoom ratio? Some users probably already obvious! But unfortunately, no one has yet invented to square the circle, so that a weaker imaging performance is an inevitability. So it's ultimately just depends on how much weaker the imaging performance and how this affects figuratively. And, dear friends of Lichtbildnerei, the Church let in the village and not investigated the extreme corners and angles of photographed from the tripod Siemens star with the 300% setting, but viewed images of real photographic subjects in the output format that you actually needed.
In this sense arises on the D800 with Vignettierungseinstellung and Distortion (who wants to make RAWs, must subsequently similar corrections in LR make) as follows:
Total supplies the 28-300 rich colors, good momentum, beautiful coarse contrast. When micro-contrast, it is somewhat weaker in the image sharpness may - also dimmed by 2 stages - the aforementioned "professional lenses" total not hold a candle. Offenblendig the focus is out in the middle of the rest of the image field significantly weaker, while it reached in 2 steps dimming an overall good level, except at 28mm, where you discovered at 2 steps dimming one or the other softer body. Altogether one can the lens but in 2 steps dimming (at 28mm better 3) confirm a proper image performance, the middle focal length range extends to even partly. 1 step dimming.
Against the blue sky photographed seen despite switched vignetting ("N") and despite dimming yet lightweight Eckenabschattungen. The bokeh is rather attributable to the restless sort, although I have certainly seen worse backgrounds.
If the lens to this fault report now bad and deserves a bad review? In answering this question we must not lose sight of the purpose of the objective. For best picture quality, there are corresponding fixed focal length or "pro zooms" (which quite a few professionals have come to appreciate the 28-300!). This optic is for's trips where you do not want to lug a heavy equipment pocket 8 hours at a stretch, for quick responses to frequently changing situations, for areas where you do not like the lens changes due to dust and moisture, and certainly a number of other situations, where is this kind of wide-ranging focal length ratio in an objective advantage. And for this lens is ideal! 2 - dimmed 3 levels it provides overall good photos, also offers a great close-up of 50cm throughout the entire zoom range, and the best part is that the close-ups and still look surprisingly good, if you can not bear a slight blur. Thus, for the journey even the macro lens to stay at home, if macros are not one of the purposes of travel.
Anyone who goes on tour and wants to be flexible and go with limited luggage, for example is ideal for city breaks equipped with 2 lenses, the 28-300 plus 2.8 / 2.8 or 14-24 / 17-35, at other giant targets the heavy WW-Zoom can well a small, lightweight 2.8 / 20 or - the 16er Fisheye, replaced - for example wonderful seaside. Even a bright 50s added and one has a gear for just about anything and everything to subjects and situations to close with the 28-300. This is the meaning of this lens - and the travel photos speak for themselves! One can alternatively "The Holy Trinity" in big bag with drag and constantly change, has missed quite a bit better picture quality, dozens of exciting picture opportunities and is at the end of the day of the smuggling groggy!
Serious alternatives? Certainly the equivalent of Tamron: advantages of lower price and smaller size and weight, the disadvantages noticeably weaker picture performance and cooler color. It is better then even the opposite the 28-300 Nikkor not much more expensive combination the Nikkor 3.5-4.5 / 24-85 VR and 4.5-5.6 / 70-300 VR. Benefits of this combination are the noticeably larger angle (24 instead of 28 mm), the better, especially in the wide-angle imaging performance, the availability of small and light 24-85 in other combinations, such as 2.8 or 4 / 70-200 or (highly recommended ) AF-S 4-5,6 / 80-400 VR and the small and lightweight 24-85 alone for more discreet photography. Disadvantages are the lack Nahaufnahmemöglichkeit (only with additional close-up lens on the 70-300 possible) and the inability of the lightning-fast switching from WW in the telephoto range; also can not form with only 2 lenses (WW-Zoom and 28-300) the dream couple for city tours with architecture on the one hand and on the other hand you Streetlife.
Conclusion for 28-300er Nikkor: class travel lens for's FX format with slight image weaknesses that not particularly stand out in beautiful travel photos (Caution DX-ler: Some tests lead to the conclusion that it is not quite as good maps DX format - s . lemondedelaphoto.com).
Final clarification: This lens is not a "panacea" and can not replace the above-mentioned professional lenses too! One can find some posts in the network of (alleged?) Professional photographers who write, they need now nothing else and would consider all your expensive stuff that you previously dragged with him to sell. Such submissions I do not consider convincing - presumably they are written in the first exuberance of feelings. To make it quite clear again: I regard this lens as a travel lens to downsizing of the equipment and to be faster on the shot. When those reasons disappear, I suppose other lenses that depict better!
Note for format changeover of DX on FX: I myself had the 18-200VR I DX and used it last on the D7000. The pictures taken with this combination seems to me slightly better, especially to be slightly sharper with comparable aperture. The DX lens is also smaller and lighter, has only a 72er filter diameter and is lighter overall händelbar. It is therefore not very devious idea - at least for the D800 15.4 MP DX-format - continue using this as a travel lens and on the full-frame camera. I myself had all DX lenses sold the format changes to the 2.8 / 10,5DX fisheye, which, as I noted, provides excellent results on the D800 DX format. So you could also try with 18-200 (if you do not already have this), in contrast to the 28-300 actually has travel format. . Disadvantages: Strong scaled viewfinder and on Bw 300mm is really the end; the 28-300 FX can be set to DX 450 mm BW. use.
